paul, et. al.
thank you for joining, sharing your pov (points of view) and
for following good dead-text protocol. i appreciate your
input and share jeremy's questions about the wtc. your
information regarding the stresses of the metals is very
here's a url for the latest shuttle development that
indicates that nasa is backing off the debris-did-the-damage
regarding the wtc, here's some urls:
i had a conversation with an engineer who inisted that i
never reveal his name--understandably, of course--and he
said that there was no way that the planes, nor the fires
could possibly have caused the collapse of the two tall
thingys. he mentioned that, prior to the collapse of the
two tall thingys, there was never any recorded collapse of
any tall steel structure due to fire anywhere in the world.
and consider that the collapses are two separate events (two
separate buildings) that happened within one hour of each
other--events that never were recorded before in the history
of steel skyscrapers. then we have two of them happening
within an hour on the same day. what are the probabilities
of that happening outside of planned 'dmlition'?
in a report, there were recorded radio transcripts from
firemen who had made it to the 78th floor of the north tall
thingy (i'm looking for the url) and they were able to
approach and stand right in the areas of impact (that were
supposedly burning with such intense heat to cause metal
failure) and were able to work up a cohesive plan of
rescue/recovery before their radio connections were somehow
cut off after the collapse of the south tall thingy, which
was the second one hit, yet the south was the first to
collapse, not the north tall thingy.
the meridian fire in la had heat that was far hotter than
the tall thingy fires and the meridian building survived
just fine. also, after the clean-up of the debris (which
was done extremely fast without following well-established
protocols of examining the debris, just like what was done
with the okc collapse), there were pools of molten metal
found in the basements of both towers. we're talking about
metal walls that were 4 inches thick and they melted. where
did that massive heat come from?
also there's the smoking gun: seismic reports. a nearby
university (i'm look'n for that url, too--gotta organize my
huge 911 file) reported seismic events that registered 2.1
on the scale just ten seconds before the end of the collapse
of the south tall thingy and again another seismic recording
of 2.0 prior to the north tall thingy collapse. such
seismic recordings did not even pick up the impact of the
thingys hitting the ground. this alone very strongly
suggests placed 'xplsives' in the tall thingys, which would
easily explain the pools of molten metal deep under the
thingys. 'xplsive' experts suggest that only micro-'newkys'
could have done that.
i am always ready to discard anything that is not the truth
or at least very close to the truth about any event--i just
wish to have truthful, accurate information about any event.
btw everyone, i wish to know if any of you are seeing any
chemtrails in the skies as of late? today is the sixth
straight day of my area being chemtrail-free! it's the
first time in a full year and a half that we have had
perfectly clear skies! wow. and the cessation of the
chemtrails in my area started on the day of the columbia
disaster. hmmm. i can see clearly for 200 miles west,
north and south and have yet to see a single chemtrail
anywhere in the skies for six straight days. i'm hoping
that this'll continue.
[non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: Metal stuff
i have a full collection of internet material on the
analysis of the wtc event on a 2x cd. can i mail
it to you?
as to your comment below. from my perch on this ridge
in the cascades i often observe the chemtrails up and
down the i-5 in the mount shasta area. i just returned from
a 6 day trip up and down the i-5 and hwy. 101. not a
chemtrail in sight. perhaps the winter rains do the job
better than the chemicals.
>btw everyone, i wish to know if any of you are seeing any
>chemtrails in the skies as of late? today is the sixth
>straight day of my area being chemtrail-free! it's the
>first time in a full year and a half that we have had
>perfectly clear skies! wow. and the cessation of the
>chemtrails in my area started on the day of the columbia
>disaster. hmmm. i can see clearly for 200 miles west,
>north and south and have yet to see a single chemtrail
>anywhere in the skies for six straight days. i'm hoping
>that this'll continue.